New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-06-11
THE DOCK BOARD INQUIRY.

COMMISSIONER MATTHEW'S AND MR. GREEN, THE
BNGISEER GIVE TESTIMONY.
Treasurer Matthews, OF the Deck Department, yes
terday testified before Commissioner Shearman in the
Dock DEP srtmsut inquiry. Mr. Matthews said that
he was appointed by Mayor Grace Dock Commits
soner In Nay, 1883. He elected treasurer Of the
Dock Board and gave bonds for $1,000. Mr..
Matthew's testimony did not diher materially from
that of Commissioner Stark on Wednesday. He did
not regard he said, TO reply to charges
respecting his character, made by Dock Superin-
tendent Liscombs and Clerk Beach, but in answer TO
a direct question by MIR. stearman he declared
that their testimony vas eptireiy and unqualihedly
false" There have been piers leased Mt private
sale he said, since his connection with the depart
ment. All piers are now leased by auction. Simon
Stevens, he said, was q lawyer having wide ao-
Quaintance with the waterfront from his clientage
He sometimes consulted by the Commissioners
informally, but he never had any privileges In the
that were not open to others. Mr. Matthews said that
he mad been q sufferer from rheumatism for NUMBER
OF years. and 1t had frequently kept him from his
ohce, although he said that he had not been absent
from bis duties any than the other Commission,
During his term treasurer OF the DOCK Board
Mr. Matthews said over ~, 600 had been paid to
him deposited in the Importers and Traders Bank
to the credit OF the City Chamberlain.
George s. Green, engineerip-chiet, was next ex-
amned by Commissioner Shearman In regard to the
difference between his estimates OF the cost oil
work done by the departTen and their actual cost
Contracts for the repair OF piers and the puldhe
new piers were taken up cOuipdieu '"O
estimates of their probable cost made by Mr. Green
to the Dock ard In several instances his estimated
cost for repairs $4,000, and the actual cost OF
the work ran from 81 700 TO $1,000. For new
pier at West Fifty-ffthst no estimated the cost at
$47 800 and the lowest bid which was accepted was
$30,296 In reply Mr. Green said that his estimate, YES
were made simply to outline the cost not to give the
lowest figures but to give inir estimate OF the prop
able cost. The bids he showed would range bevond
his estimates as we'll as below them. Contractors
often Tor special reasons known only to themselves TO
get the work would lid exceptionally low us
estimates made the current cost OF materaI;
whereas contractors would frequently have material
that they could afford to put In at low ngures; In
ard to the Fity-fith-st pier and several others,
the difference between his estimate and the bid was
our ted for by the that he had Introduced by
the cor sent OF the present board new sy stem OF
contracts These show in detail the quantity OF every
article used in the piers Contractors had objected 10
1t giving away their business but the result hau
reduced the figures beyond his own expectations by
bringing in a larger competition . -,
The examination will 60 next week. MT smear
man said that he in ended following up the inquiry
respecting the cost OF work by calling other withesses